Earlier quoted context omitted.
> A lot of low rent internet chum would also disappear. So maybe that's a fair trade off, but it will also hurt your local newspaper pretty badly. Wow, we have _completely_ different understandings of the value of the Internet. To me, the (realized) promise of the Internet is not just an additional channel for established media, it's the decentralization of publishing in the first place. "Low rent internet chum" is a…
Ad networks have been a key enabler of decentralized publishing. Anyone can sign up to an ad network and start getting paid for clicks. No traditional gatekeepers there. So I'm not sure where you get this idea that what I'm saying is in any way contradictory to what you said.
The implication of the above comment is "low rent chum will die (good) but establishment channels like newspapers will also die (bad)". I'm saying that the decentralized "low rent" stuff is the value of the Internet imo, not providing another medium for channels that already exist.